Is anyone still shooting and uploading film?

[Ed Endicott]

I still love shooting with film.  I've seen a few threads (very helpful) about cleaning up old archive slides and having submitted them a year or two ago, but I'm curious if anyone is still shooting and uploading film?  Does grain matter and is it acceptable (Ilford HP5 or TRI X)?  My local "Pro" camera store still offers the service of development (even push/pull processing) and flat bed scanning to 48mb TIFF files.

[Chuck Nacke]

Ed,

 

I would say that I spend about 70% of my time scanning old chromes and a few negatives for upload to Alamy.

I would also guess that about 90% of the images I currently have available on Alamy are scans from 35mm film.

 

I'd also appreciate hearing from anyone about what currently available negative film scans well?

I have preferred FUJI Reala, 100 ASA neg, but it is not currently available. I just ran some

Kodak Professional PORTRA 160 through my 4000dpi Canon scanner and I was not impressed with

the PORTRA. E-6 is not an option as there is no place close by to me to get it processed.

Man, I miss the days of getting my K-14 processed in an hour and a-half.

[Ed Endicott]

Chuck, I have a camera currently loaded with Ektar 100.  I'm going to try that next.  Portra seems to give a pink tinge that I don't like.

 

Last weekend, I spent the day shooting a cathedral here in Denver.  I used a Fuji X-Pro 1 for digital, and I used a roll of TMAX 400 pushed to 1600.  I got the images from the Fuji accepted at Alamy (it has decent high ISO performance and I prefer it for that over my 5DIII) but in all honesty, I think the TMAX gave the better image quality.  I know it's black and white, but I love the look and the contrast.

 

I have 5 rolls of Velvia and 10 rolls of TriX in the fridge.  I'm going to shoot them regardless of whether I can upload them...I just really enjoy shooting film for some reason and I'd love to upload them here instead or in addition to print to order places.

[Rosemary Hawkins]

I just used a store credit at Calumet here in New York to buy (in part) 5 rolls each of Fujichrome 120 in ISO 100 and ISO 400, and 5 rolls of Fujichrome 400 in 35mm.  I have several medium format cameras I use (including the wide angle Fuji 6x9 and recently a Bronica C) and various 35mm including an Olympus XA.

 

I send my film to thedarkroom.com in California and they upload the scans on their site in a few days and then return the films with a CD.  For Alamy or gallery prints (or FAA) I re-scan with my Minolta Multi Pro or Minolta 5400 however.  I have used film more for prints (and FAA) than Alamy lately but do have some film scans on Alamy.

[Chris P]

I've had scans of medium-format Velvia accepted in the past. I would still use film if I could allocate space for processing at home. I've kept a Bronica ETRSi, a Hasselblad Xpan and a Nikon FM3a(for infra-red film) all of which I really enjoy using. I doubt that I shall ever print in a darkroom again but will, one day, set up my Nova darkroom tent and use the film cameras again. This, though, would be for the pleasure of doing so rather than with a view to having material uploaded to Alamy.

[Steve B]

I still use and develop at home ektar, velvia 50 and provia in my Mamiya RB67 and C330 and find that I can get good scans from it, I have uploaded the odd couple just to see if they get accepted ( and they do ) I try and keep my film stuff for my own enjoyment ( there is nothing like seeing a roll of 6 x 7 medium format velvia come out of the developing tank ) as I think it is a bit time consuming for my stock images..

[Ed Rooney]

Ah, the sweet nostalgia of film shooting. I remember the cost per roll of color film with processing was about $16.00 a roll, but I guess it's a bit more now . . . $16 for 36 frames. Then there was the fun of trying to load a roll of Tri-X into a Leica M camera while under fire with my hands shaking. But my fondest #1 memory of shooting film is trying to move a duffle bag with 500 rolls of color over some Third World border. 

 

As a hobby? Sure, people have all sorts of hobbies. For stock? No thanks. 

[Sheila Smart]

The closest I get to chemicals these days is the 220 preservative in my Aussie chardonnay in front of my computer as I process my digital files. Gone are the days of red lights, standing in almost complete darkness and the aroma of fixing chemicals...aahhh, nostalgia aint what it used to be! This nostalgia reminds me of when I lived in Canada in the seventies. A friend borrowed his friend's film camera (of course) and went for a holiday to Florida and when he returned, he told his friend that he would replace the film in the camera which he had yet to remove. His friend said "What film?" ...groan. Sheila

[Ed Endicott]

Haha...yes...one of the reasons I love film and I feel like I'm creating photographs as opposed to when I shoot digital.  Ed and Sheila, I have done the very same.  Leica M6 loaded with Tri-X over the winter and carried around.  I got some EXCELLENT images of a woman on a train, snow falling near a street light, etc.  Stuff that was a bit cliched but that I was really looking forward to seeing.  The last image was one of my sick dog who I had the pleasure of living with for 9 years (it broke my heart losing him to an autoimmune disease).  When I went to process the roll, it came back blank...the winder failed to grab and having shot the digital so much, I didn't use the safety check of feeling the other side of the spool advance with a finger on my left hand.

 

....but I still have those memories of all those great images!

 

Either way, there is something about it that makes me feel like I'm actually creating something as opposed to doing my best to capture an image and then racing home to edit it on the computer.  Maybe I should start shooting jpg instead of raw?

[Robert M Estall]

ah, the shameful memory of shooting without any film in the camera. Not lots, but a few occasions. I always swore: NEVER AGAIN! But I think I always spotted it in time and once with a client by my elbow got away with it with "just one more roll to be entirely safe" 

 

The thing which really forced me to commit to digital was getting film processed in a timely & handy way. And then Nikon turned their back on keeping my LS 9000 working physically and with software support. Disgraceful!

 

What I do miss is the speed and convenience of sorting a batch of transparencies on a light box with a decent loupe.

[Charles Stirling]

I loved the lighter weight of my film slr compared to the digital SLR, but when I lost access to a darkroom too often film sent out came back in a poor state with scratches or water marks. Stayed with film for a while when most were going digital as my underwater housing was for a film camer (Nikon F100 - which was great) but changed eventually so I could take more than 36 images on a dive.  No great desire to go back to film though it had (has) many good points.

[alaskadude]

I am only a recent convert to Digital. I am scanning slides still and Submitting to Alamy, but I am selling all my film gear on ebay. It is selling briskly and I am quickley clearing the shelf. I would still shoot film, but it is way too expensive. Im enjoying the freedom of digital.

[Trevor Chriss]

Ah nostalgia, it's not what it used to be.

[DavidC]

.......and then there was the joy of slicing the tips off your fingers while loading 9cmx 12cm glass plates into single metal holders for the Peeling & Van Neck press camera* - FP shutter set by manual tension springs - no auto focusing - no exposure checks - one shot, and you better get it right - yes those were the days my friends - 'till you softees came along with your Rollies and Leicas.  Would much rather join Sheila with her chemical Chardonay than ingest more chemicals in a darkroom !!!!!

 

* Still got the camera on a shelf in my office - very nostalgic.........(it is CXFKKN if anyone really cares)

[Trevor Chriss]

Then again there was the joy of reloading 20 or 30, 10x8 or 8x6 dark slides on location. Usually in a dirty cellar which was the only place that was anywhere near dark enough. 

No I don't miss those days.

[Niels Quist]

Is anyone still shooting and uploading film?

 

Excuse me my bad humour, but reading this headline I cannot help picturing the obvious difficulties there would have to be overcome if you wanted to upload film digitally. My pc doesn't have have a slot for this - nor the long tube to the UK.... 

[Mike Denham]

I still primarily still shoot film as that is what all of my equipment is.  I have a digital camera, but for my serious work, I still prefer film as I also have a pro film scanner.  This allows me to digitize the images and work with them just as if they were shot digitally.  I like the warmth and look of film still, it also seems to have better shadow detail. 

[Mike Denham]

I shoot film, my equipment is all film still, yes I have a digital camera, but use it only for a quick preview of what the shot will look like, like the days of instant film backs on medium format cameras.  I have a new 7200 dpi scanner and do upload from my files from scanning.  Maybe someday I will go all digital, but for now I'm still a film guy and have quite a stock of film in the 'fridge.

[wiskerke]

Ah and my Sinar! The Hasselblads! The Bronicas! And my beloved Om4s. (You will all have heard by now that Leica just snapped up Sinar last Monday?)

 

wim

 

(Because one of my teachers died, I am actually sifting through piles of negatives from the early eighties right now and praying the Coolscan will work under Windows 7.)

[Pakodominguez]

I just used a store credit at Calumet here in New York to buy (in part) 5 rolls each of Fujichrome 120 in ISO 100 and ISO 400, and 5 rolls of Fujichrome 400 in 35mm.  I have several medium format cameras I use (including the wide angle Fuji 6x9 and recently a Bronica C) and various 35mm including an Olympus XA.

 

I send my film to thedarkroom.com in California and they upload the scans on their site in a few days and then return the films with a CD.  For Alamy or gallery prints (or FAA) I re-scan with my Minolta Multi Pro or Minolta 5400 however.  I have used film more for prints (and FAA) than Alamy lately but do have some film scans on Alamy.

CRC (http://vistaimaginggroup.com/) just next door from calumet, does a good job developing negatives and slides. They are probably the only "small" lab that remains in Chelsea now...

[DC shooter]

I had had some black and white film images rejected by QC, so I am interested in other's experiences with black and white film. There is no way to remove all of the dust spots. Are images getting through anyway? 

[Lynn Palmer]

After several moves there's nothing I miss about my film camera and darkroom equipment or the storing of bulky files and negatives....I love, love, love digital!

[Rosemary Hawkins]

 

I just used a store credit at Calumet here in New York to buy (in part) 5 rolls each of Fujichrome 120 in ISO 100 and ISO 400, and 5 rolls of Fujichrome 400 in 35mm.  I have several medium format cameras I use (including the wide angle Fuji 6x9 and recently a Bronica C) and various 35mm including an Olympus XA.

 

I send my film to thedarkroom.com in California and they upload the scans on their site in a few days and then return the films with a CD.  For Alamy or gallery prints (or FAA) I re-scan with my Minolta Multi Pro or Minolta 5400 however.  I have used film more for prints (and FAA) than Alamy lately but do have some film scans on Alamy.

CRC (http://vistaimaginggroup.com/) just next door from calumet, does a good job developing negatives and slides. They are probably the only "small" lab that remains in Chelsea now...

 

 

Thanks  Pakodominguez,  will keep them in mind.

 

I've also started using the Konica Hexar AF the last few months - I think the lens is amazing.  Planning to scan a few images from it when I get the chance.

[mickfly]

I probably miss my film camera more than the actual film stock, although I do still like the look of film. I miss the 3 way focusing screen, ground glass, bezel and split screen which allowed me to manual focus in an instant, but also the simplicity of setting at 125, pre focusing at 9' and being able to compensate very quickly using the traffic light system and a quick turn of the aperture ring. Yashica FX7, still have it, but not used since the 1990's.
The mention of chemicals brought the smells back to me, and I certainly don't miss the hours spent in my darkroom.

[Mark]

I had had some black and white film images rejected by QC, so I am interested in other's experiences with black and white film. There is no way to remove all of the dust spots. Are images getting through anyway? 

 

I do quite a bit of black and white. A few end up on alamy. They go through without failures. Kodak Tmax 400, Nikon 4000 (turn off ICE, multiscan etc spot defects in photoshop). Key point is the negatives are clean and flat (my lab works very well in this respect). I blow off residual dust if  required.  I know some folks clean up the negatives first (perhaps if old negatives), but never had to do that. Clearly, if the negatives are splattered with dust spots, then failure is guaranteed.